New York Times Cites Effectiveness of ProEnglish

New York Times Cites Effectiveness of ProEnglish Testimony in Opposition Editorial

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:                                                                     Contact: Robert Vandervoort
August 15, 2012                                                                                         Phone: (703) 816-8821

ARLINGTON, VA – ProEnglish, the nation’s leading advocate of official English, responded to a recent New York Times editorial that opposes making English the official language of the federal government.  The editorial cited the congressional testimony given by ProEnglish Chairwoman Dr. Rosalie Porter on August 2nd before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution.

“While we’re please to see the Times take notice of our efforts, we strongly dispute their characterization of this bill as ‘English Only,’ ” said ProEnglish Executive Director Robert Vandervoort.  “This bill is concerned with how the federal government communicates in its official capacity, not with private sector matters.”

The New York Times editorial says the bill appeals to ‘nostalgia for a mythical past,’ when in fact it is a bill very much needed today to encourage assimilation and prevent Balkanization,” stated Vandervoort.

In her testimony on Capitol Hill, Dr. Porter testified, “Language is one of the greatest ties that bind a nation together and declaring English to be our official language sends a clear message to immigrants to learn the language.”

“Making English the official language of the United States will also help the federal government avoid unnecessary and costly translation services that prevent people from learning English,” Dr. Porter stated.  Dr. Porter testified in favor of Rep. Steve King (R-IA)’s “English Language Unity Act,” (H.R. 997), which currently has 122 bi-partisan cosponsors.